Uttarakhand High Court
Lamisha Abidin vs Collector on 1 August, 2022
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
Writ Petition (M/S) No. 1803 of 2022
Lamisha Abidin ..................Petitioner
-Versus-
Collector, Nainital and Others ..............Respondents
Present: Mr. Deep Chandra Joshi, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Mr. Suyash Pant, learned Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand.
Date of Hearing and Order: 01.08.2022
Sri Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, J.
Upon hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the Court
made the following order:-
1. By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for
issuance of a writ of Certiorari for quashing the
impugned rejection order dated 14.09.2021 passed by
respondent no. 3 - Tehsildar, Haldwani, District
Nainital.
2. The petitioner has also prayed for issuance of a writ of
Mandamus by directing respondents to issue Other
Backward Class (OBC) certificate in favour of the
petitioner forthwith. The Tehsildar, Haldwani rejected
the petitioner's application for grant of Other Backward
Class certificate in her favour. The petitioner belongs to
"Mobin Ansar", which is defined as a caste belonging to
the Other Backward Class by the State of Uttarakhand.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner also avers that in
the year 2000, her father has obtained OBC certificate
from the State of Uttar Pradesh. However, after
formation of Uttarakhand in the year 2000, petitioner is
residing in Haldwani, District Nainital and is a
permanent resident of the State of Uttarakhand. The
application of the petitioner was rejected without giving
any reasons and therefore, it is the violation of
principles of natural justice. Once, an applicant files an
application before the Authorities for grant of a
certificate in the nature of the Other Backward Class
certificate, then not only he/she should be given an
opportunity of hearing and producing documents but
also, if the Authorities take a contrary view and reject
his/her application and he/she must be communicated
with the reasons, for which, his/her application was
rejected.
4. In this case, the petitioner's application was rejected by
one line order, and therefore, this Court is of the
opinion that the order passed by the learned Tehsildar
- respondent no. 3 cannot be sustained as it is without
reasons.
5. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is allowed.
The order dated 14.09.2021 is hereby set-aside or
quashed.
6. Mr. Suyash Pant, learned Standing Counsel would
submit that there is a violation of Clause 7 of
Government Order dated 02.04.2013 (Annexure No. 4
to the writ petition) which has been issued by the State
of Uttarakhand and in such cases, the certificate
issued by any other States, should be cancelled. It is
also brought to the notice of this Court, father of the
petitioner has already filed an application before the
learned Tehsildar for cancelling the certificate granted
to her and issuance of certificate in favour of the
petitioner. These questions were the subject matter of
dispute in several other cases, vide judgments and
orders passed by the learned Coordinate Benches in
WPMS No. 2523 of 2020 and WPMS No. 514 of 2022, or
dated 23.08.2021 and 11.07.2022, respectively.
7. This Court comes to the conclusion that a person, who
is a citizen of India irrespective of her actual residence,
if at present, she is residing in the State of
Uttarakhand, then she is entitled to a certificate in the
State of Uttarakhand in evidence of the caste to which
she belongs to.
8. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is allowed
directing the respondent no. 3 to issue a proper caste
certificate in favour of the petitioner within a period of
21 days from production of certified copy of this order.
If it is found that the father of the petitioner has
obtained any caste certificate from the State of Uttar
Pradesh, then also that certificate will not be a bar for
granting certificate in favour of the petitioner, unless it
is established by the State of Uttarakhand, she is not a
permanent resident of Haldwani, District Nainital in the
State of Uttarakhand. To that extent, this Court is of
the opinion that the Clause 7 of the Government Order
cannot be mechanically applied to all the cases, in
which, any of the members of the petitioner's family
has obtained certificate from another State. This Clause
shall be applicable only when the petitioner herself has
obtained a certificate from any State. In that case,
before issuing certificate, the State of Uttarakhand
shall insist for cancellation or surrender of earlier caste
certificate in addition to proof of present residence in
the State of Uttarakhand.
9. With such observations, the writ petition is disposed of.
(Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, J.)
01.08.2022
(Grant urgent certified copy as per Rules)
A/-
